The only vaguely plausible explanation I ever heard was that because the shaft is so long (since it's a direct drive) it can sag when it's hot. By rotating it you keep it from sagging downward as it cools. But honestly that still sounds like bull since it's not going to cool significantly in the minutes you're turning it...

For a "normal" flight under instrument flight rules (any airline flight), it's to your destination, plus the fuel required to get to an alternate (if required based on the weather), and after that still fly for 45 minutes. The rules change if you're going to remote islands and stuff, but that's the basics.

If you want the reduced total times (1000/1250 total time) then yes, you need to accomplish some training (as others said) at a university.

If you just need the reduced cross-country or night requirement, then you can have gotten all your stuff done anywhere and still get the R-ATP provided you have 1500 hours total time. But given your flair is PPL, I'm guessing that's not your issue.

I think this is a huge issue that's not getting enough love, largely because it's very technical.

All gyros, from my vacuum powered mechanical device to brand new, no-moving-parts electronic ones driving LCD screens, are rate based. That is, they watch for changes in rotation (in three axes) from moment to moment. Digital devices might do it in software, but it amounts to the same thing: over the last 10 millisconds, how much did this axis rotate?

Such devices are prone to drift. If it's off by a little bit, it doesn't sound like a big problem, but it adds up over time. If I built a gyro that drifted only 0.1 degree per minute, I'd think I'd never notice that on the little screen. It sounds like a tight spec. An hour of flying, though, would then show a 6 degree change. That's a bit deal!

To avoid this, attitude indicators are made to slowly nudge back to some, probably-correct level. They all do this, even the old vacuum powered mechanical gyros. Those have that mechanical system of pendulous vanes, or something, that slowly nudges the gyro to correct down to the local gravity. It assumes that, most of the time, you're flying pretty close to straight and level. Since that's true, especially in instrument flight, it corrects the natural drift.

Newer AHRS systems can do the same thing, but it's in software instead of a mechanical system. They might reference other things to figure out which way is up as well, including:

local gravity (like mechanical gyros, but with an accelerometer sensor)

direction of the magnetic field from a 3-axis magnetometer (Oh, I'm flying in Pennsylvania? The magnetic field should be about half a gauss, pointing towards magnetic north and about 63 degrees down. That's a good reference.)

GPS data. Sensing the track is kind of like heading, so that might be helpful in figuring out if the wings are level. Sure, not as a primary indicator, but as the sensor-drift-corrector, it's a doable thing.

Combining air data from pitot static as well. (See the recent Matt Guthmiller video with the complete failure of an Aspen ADAHRS)

I think the problem that training and we pilots need to bring to the fore is that we have no idea how these systems work when we jump into the airplane. We studied details to understand how the six-pack works and how different pieces relate to one another. It's why I know to disregard the attitude and heading indicators but trust the turn coordinator when the vacuum pump dies. It's why I know the attitude indicator works great if the electricity goes away. Turn the master off, it still works.

None of these choices are necessarily evil (though I'd argue some are pretty poor), but it's difficult to even know these interrelationships. What is a G1000 using to correct attitude gyro drift? How is it different in a G650? Or an Aspen? Or Avidyne?

Say I'm a private pilot with instrument rating. I need to build 150 hours to be eligible for my commercial. I also want to get my multi rating at some point; is there any point in getting my multi before my commercial or is it better to wait until I have my commercial single, this way I only do one multi checkride for my multi commercial as opposed to multi private and multi commercial later?

It's worth noting that I have an opportunity to fly in a Baron every now and then. Once I have my multi and high performance I'd be able to log this flight time at no cost.

My thinking was that if I get my multi private ASAP then I have the opportunity to log at least 10 hours per month of multi time in the Baron FOR FREE.

Would this not make it worth having a second checkride at a later date for my commercial multi? Not only does this flight time count towards my commercial minimums but it's also free multi time that I'll need for ATP mins....

I'll add here that you should be cautious of the flight school's policy on this. If you're the one who got the rental checkout, then you're the one who is expected to act as PIC. If your friend hasn't been checked out and is acting as PIC, the flight school - and more importantly the insurance company - might not cover the school if something happens. If insurance doesn't pay out (even if they do), guess who is gonna get sued! :D

Realistically how long should I expect to be at a regional before I could apply to somewhere like Delta, United, American, Hawaiian or Alaska? Not trying to rush through my regional career as I’m very excited for it when it comes, but just curious.

As to why one airline might not cancel as much as another, it’s just different operational theories. Yesterday Delta cancelled everything out of Boston after about 10 AM. I mean everything. Including the NY shuttles. JetBlue was still trying, and American hung in there for a little bit but ended up cancelling their shuttles for the most part.

Delta’s theory is more along the lines of amputate the arm to save the body. With such a large operation, you don’t want one corner of the country to affect everyone else. So just cancel like mad and go into the next day full bore and recover.

JetBlue’s theory seems more along the lines of, the more you can keep going, the less you’ll have to recover on the next day.

I'd imagine, as you mentioned, a lot of it has to do with size. JetBlue is a lot smaller than Delta, and more of their operation is concentrated in the NE. So if they didn't try, they'd basically just have to shut the airline down for a day or two. Delta can make up using planes and pilots positioned in ATL, MSP, DTW, SLC...way more resources.

Well, there's rarely anything wrong with doing some intensive training. The more frequently the fly the better training will go for you, no matter who you're flying with.

But the thing to do is discuss it with your CFI. If they're that good, they'll hopefully have already started planning how to transition you to a new CFI. I've had to do it a couple times and I always made sure the student felt supported, understood what was going on, and how the training was going to progress. If it's handled professionally, it shouldn't be a big deal and your training should continue with minimal disruption.

Rationally, I understand this. But it’s hard to be rational when you’re inside a giant metal thing that is getting further and further from the ground and moving in a way that makes you feel like you are going to throw up.

It's basically any kind of air movement that moves quickly or changes suddenly enough to jostle the plane.

Close to the ground, that's going to be wind. Most people get that. Up high, it's more often vertical movement of air driven by convection, frontal activity, or moving through a kind of boundary layer in the atmosphere (tops/bottoms of clouds, wind direction change between two altitudes if it's sudden). This is why clouds tend to be pretty bumpy, especially cumuliform ones. There's a lot of air moving up and down in there.

The final kind of turbulence that is relevant here would be wake turbulence. That's the churned up air behind other airplanes. If you cross far enough below it or behind it, it's just a kind of sudden bump and that's it, especially if you go perpendicular to the other airplane's flight path. But if you are following someone then it'll be lots of sharp little bumps. If you're too close, however...it's bad. Violent upsetting of your airplane, including turning you upside down in the more severe cases. For this reason airplanes only follow each other so close (especially during take-off and landing), and pilots keep an eye outside and try to stay above and behind anyone we're following.

If properly calculated, the VDP merely is the point from which a "normal descent is accomplished using normal maneuvers" to the runway. For example, a VDP may be calculated for a 3 degree angle. If you plan your rate of descent from the FAF to the VDP, then the angular transition to the runway from the VDP is also 3 degrees. You can certainly descend prior or after the VDP provided it's "normal" for your aircraft. For example, I doubt it's normal for you to fly past the VDP, see the runway later, and attempt to descend using a 7 degree stuka dive bomber angle.

There's a lousy history of flight schools and pre-payment. It's not at all unheard of for the school to take your money (and many others') with the promise of training, but then for one reason or another...no training happens. Sometimes the entire school goes out of business. Sometimes their fleet of airplanes (maybe only the one trainer) isn't available. Maybe the instructors aren't around.

In the end, it means you're out a lot of money and don't get what you need.

I could be pedantic and point out that piston singles have even been used as airlines! But I'll assume you mean swept wing jets.

While I suppose it's possible, and I'm sure someone has done it (eg: Gimli Glider as u/Zeus1325 mentioned), the prevailing wisdom is don't do it, especially for something with a super-critical airfoil and/or high degree of sweep. You'll basically blank out the wing at the back and stall the wing. Then over and down you go...

I am looking at a survey company, and their min time is 350tt. I'm currently sitting at 270 with 70ME. Their min is 20. I'm not graduating college until june, and I'll be doing CFII starting in March. I plan on doing a little flight instructing to get closer to 350. Should I apply now, or wait until I get closer to June? I'm worried that the job will be taken if I wait too long, but I don't want to apply with TT too low so they'll just throw my resume in the pile. Are people leaving survey company's to go to airlines a lot?

Some oddity (you get used to them though) are the Mooney's iconic johnson-bar landing gear retraction.

The first half of the production Comanche 250s have a hand break for the brakes (no toe brakes), so that takes a little getting used to.

Other than that, you've got personal preference. The Comanche is an amazing plane, and it's basically Piper's attempt to rip off the Mooney design (it's a fun story, look it up on google), which is why it's so different from the other Pipers out there.